As many of you will have seen, unfortunately the Ubuntu Edge campaign did not reach our goal of $32million. The final total reached was $12,812,776. I am hugely proud and thankful to everyone who pledged, supported the campaign, wrote about it, and helped to spread the word. Some have described us not meeting the goal as a “failure”. I don’t see it that way. Let’s be honest: $32million was always an incredibly ambitious target. We would have liked to have done it for less money, but building a F1 superphone doesn’t come cheap (and remember that the $32million didn’t include any costs for software engineering and project management…Canonical were providing that for free). It was an ambitious target, but disrupting an industry is ambitious in itself, and we gave the crowd-funding campaign our best shot. The story does not end here though. I am not surprised that we didn’t hit this ambitious $32million target, but I am surprised at what we did achieve. We broke all the crowd-funding records, garnered media attention across CNBC, Engadget, The Independent, TechCrunch, the BBC, T3, Stuff, The Verge, The Guardian, Wired, pandodaily, Fast Company, Forbes, The Telegraph and more. Every single person who put their support into the Ubuntu Edge campaign should be proud of their achievements and we are all thankful for your tremendous and inspiring support. One thing to be critically clear about is that the Ubuntu convergence story does not end here. We are as voraciously excited and committed to bringing this Free Software convergence story to the world as ever before; our work with OEMs, Carriers, and ISVs continues apace. We have fantastic work going on across all fronts, and we are on track to have a 1.0 release of the Ubuntu Phone platform in October. According to the above context, answer the following question. The author in the text believes:
raising $32 million is an incredibly ambitious target
--
The violent ambush that killed five Dallas police officers and wounded seven more could have been a lot worse, the city's police chief says. Dallas Chief of Police David Brown told CNN Sunday that the slain gunman told police negotiators he wanted to "kill white people, especially white officers." Bomb making materials and a journal were found at Johnson's home during a search Friday. "The material were such that it was large enough to have devastating effects throughout our city and our North Texas area," Brown said. Micah Xavier Johnson, 25, was killed by police in the deadly attack Thursday night during a protest against police killings of African American men. Since the shooting deaths of two black men by white police officers over two days last week, protests have been held across the country. Scores of demonstrators have been arrested, with one flash point being the southern city of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, where DeRay McKesson, one of the most prominent activists linked to the police reform protest movement Black Lives Matter, live streamed his own arrest. Police defended his arrest as a matter of public safety, but demonstrators told U.S. news outlets they believe McKesson was targeted. McKesson was freed on bond Sunday afternoon after being charged with obstructing a highway. "I remain disappointed in the Baton Rouge police, who continue to provoke protesters for peacefully protesting. There's a lot of work to be done, with this police department specifically,'' he said. But Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards disagreed with McKesson's assessment. The governor told a news conference Sunday that he is proud of the state's law enforcement officers, calling their response to the protests "moderate." In the northern city of St. Paul, Minnesota, where a second man, Philando Castile, was shot to death last week by a policeman after a traffic stop for a broken tail light, hundreds of protesters hurled firecrackers, rocks and bottles at police on Saturday. The heavily armed officers used smoke grenades and... According to the above context, answer the following question. What is probably true about about Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards?
He will not have visited prominent activists DeRay McKesson anytime soon.
--
The doctors told me I would be placed on a seventy-two hour hold for observation. Knowing this was the only way out, I obeyed and diligently signed all the papers. I hated my parents but still felt the inescapable drive to prove to them that I was worth something. I had to show them I wasn't crazy. As the hours passed, I was shown to a blank room with plastic sheets and plastic pillows, which caused me to wonder what kind of distant confused souls had been imprisoned in this sterile place. There were bars on the windows and the only door out of the unit was locked 24/7. I knew my only refuge for the time being would be through the hour a day art therapy class and the smoke breaks I could take at will. They had given me a legal pad after my parents had told them of my affinity for writing. With it I set to work on the flow of words and the river of thoughts, both dark and hopeful that careened through my tired mind. Instead of sleep, I would write. I expressed my vicious frustration for the place and thought constantly of the passing hours, counting them down as they went. Because of this I was thankful for the eight to ten I would use up easily in my escapes to the world behind my eyelids. There I was free and could experience a life unhindered by limitations of ethics or gravity. When I'd awake I'd write what I could remember of my escapes on the obtrusive legal pad. I had the suspicion that the attendants would come in and read my thoughts as I was eating meals or watching TV and I wondered if this was hindering my ability to get out. I wondered what kind of opinions and judgments they were forming about me. I had bared my soul on those pages explaining desperately how the thoughts would not leave even in this place, where it mattered most that they were gone. The fuckers would never leave. Maybe I was crazy. According to the above context, answer the following question. When did the speaker sign the papers?
before the observation
--
The Trump administration’s recent airstrikes in Syria – just the latest action in a long-running conflict that has challenged U.S. presidents of both parties – has prompted a new round of questions on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers are asking where last week's strikes fit in the larger U.S. strategy in response to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and for greater clarity to prevent an escalation of the conflict.  “There needs to be a comprehensive strategy here laid out by the administration for Congress in terms of the options to pursue because of the urgency,” House Foreign Affairs Chairman Ed Royce said during a House panel Wednesday. “Does the administration support imposing costs on the Russians and the Iranians for their role in the Assad regime’s war crimes against its own people?”  In his speech announcing the air strikes to the American people Friday, President Trump said the United States is “prepared to sustain this response until the Syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents.” But later Friday, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said the latest action against Assad was a “one-time shot.” Trump ordered Friday's strikes just weeks after saying the U.S. would “be coming out of Syria like very soon," reflecting changes in the administration’s posture in response to Assad’s reported use of prohibited chemical agents.  “We’re at a real risk here of conducting strikes without any clear strategy,” Brian Katulis, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, told VOA. “The Trump administration for the past several months has issued contradictory statements, with former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and some diplomats saying that the U.S. troops inside Syria, in eastern Syria, would be dedicated to also countering Iran inside Syria. The Pentagon was saying something completely different – defeating ISIS and continuing that campaign,” he said.  Trump administration officials told a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs committee Wednesday the president’s goals in Syria remain clear. According to the above context, answer the following question. How long did Trump's speech last for?

under 24 hours
--